Partisan ReviewEdit

Partisan Review emerged in the 1930s as a bold attempt to fuse literary culture with serious political thinking. Based in New York, it was founded in 1934 by Philip Rahv and William Phillips as a quarterly that would treat art, ideas, and public life as part of a single, consequential conversation. Over the decades, the magazine helped shape the language of American cultural and political discourse by publishing authors and critics who believed that literature and criticism could illuminate the best and worst in public life. Its influence extended well beyond its pages, helping to cultivate a cohort of thinkers who would later leave a lasting mark on American intellectual life. Philip Rahv William Phillips Lionel Trilling Mary McCarthy New York Intellectuals

Origins and early years

Partisan Review began in a moment when the boundaries between left-leaning political critique and literary criticism were porous. Its early editors and contributors sought to defend liberal humanism against both fascist and totalitarian alternatives, while insisting that literature mattered for understanding democracy and human dignity. The magazine’s stance was not doctrinaire; it favored rigorous argument, a reverence for literate form, and a distrust of grand ideological simplifications. In these years, it attracted writers who valued critical independence and a devotion to high culture as a bulwark against both conformism and tyranny. Literary criticism Liberalism Democracy

Contributors across its early years helped establish a model for what would be called the New York Intellectuals, a circle of critics and essayists who treated literature as a key site for moral and political reflection. Among them were figures who would become central to mid-century debates on culture, politics, and society. The magazine’s pages bridged an appreciation for canonical writers with a willingness to engage pressing political questions, from the dangers of totalitarianism to the responsibilities of scholars and journalists in public life. New York Intellectuals Irving Howe Mary McCarthy Dwight Macdonald

Editorial line and influence

As the decades progressed, Partisan Review became known for its insistence that culture and politics could not be separated without harm to both. It stressed the role of the critic as a public intellectual who could illuminate the moral texture of political choices. The magazine carried essays and reviews on literature, philosophy, social thought, and international affairs, often with a skeptical eye toward dogmatic ideologies on either wing. In the postwar era, this broadened into a defense of liberal democratic norms, a concern for humanistic values, and a wary stance toward totalitarian tendencies—whether on the right or the left. Liberal democracy Cultural criticism Anti-totalitarianism

Notable contributors and influences

Lionel Trilling, a central voice in literary and cultural criticism, helped anchor Partisan Review in the disciplined study of culture as a public good. Lionel Trilling
Mary McCarthy contributed incisive prose and criticism that treated literature as a means of examining moral and political life. Mary McCarthy
Dwight Macdonald offered sharp essays on mass culture, political economy, and the ethics of modern criticism. Dwight Macdonald
Irving Howe, a prolific essayist and editor, helped push debates about democracy, socialism, and American life into the magazine’s pages. Irving Howe
Daniel Bell’s sociological perspectives on postwar capitalism and social structure found a home in its pages, linking cultural critique to social analysis. Daniel Bell

These and other voices established Partisan Review as a locus for a distinctive American intellectual sensibility—one that valued rigorous argument, was skeptical of ideological extremes, and saw literature as a reliable guide to political discernment. The magazine thus became a bridge between literary modernism and the practical questions of governance, liberty, and the public good. Modernism Literary criticism Public sphere

Controversies and debates

The magazine’s long arc was not without fault lines or controversy. Its early alignment with left-leaning circles drew fire from those who believed it should stay strictly within the confines of literary criticism, arguing that political commitments compromised artistic judgment. Conversely, as Partisan Review embraced anti-totalitarian liberalism in the Cold War era, it drew criticism from some on the political left who viewed its anti-Communist posture as a capitulation to orthodoxy or to what they called McCarthyite excess. These tensions reflected a broader debate within American intellectual life about how to balance criticism, public responsibility, and personal liberty. Left-wing politics Anti-communism McCarthyism

From a broader cultural perspective, the magazine faced critiques that it could be elitist or disconnected from the concerns of ordinary people. Proponents of a more populist or mass-culture approach argued for different standards of accessibility in criticism and for a greater emphasis on social and economic reform in addition to literary merit. Advocates of the magazine’s approach, however, contended that serious culture and robust public debate require disciplined standards, historical awareness, and a willingness to critique both domination and conformity. This disagreement—between cultural seriousness and populist expectations—became a defining feature of mid-20th-century American intellectual life. Populism Cultural elite

The neoconservative thread and later influence

A notable thread in Partisan Review’s later history is its connection to the emergence of a line of political thought that would come to be associated, in academic and policy circles, with neoconservatism. The editors and contributors who passed through its pages helped seed a tradition that later sought to fuse a commitment to liberty, a skeptical eye toward totalitarian ideologies, and a proactive stance on international affairs. This lineage influenced later outlets and debates about national security, the role of intellectuals in statecraft, and the defense of liberal-democratic norms. Neoconservatism Commentary (magazine) Irving Kristol Norman Podhoretz

Legacy

Partisan Review’s legacy lies in its enduring example of a magazine that treated criticism as a public good and that believed ideas could and should shape political life. By foregrounding rigorous literary and cultural analysis as a way to understand democracy, the magazine helped legitimize a form of public intellectual work that remains influential in American discourse. Its alumni and the debates it fostered contributed to shaping how commentators think about liberty, responsibility, and the limits of ideology in public life. Public intellectual American liberalism

See also the broader currents it helped to mobilize, including the ongoing conversation between literature and political life, and the evolution of conservative and liberal critiques of culture in the United States. Literary modernism Anti-totalitarianism New York Intellectuals